What's new

Worlds 10 Most Maneuverable Fighter Jets

.
Somebody needs to neuter this one.... Do the honors @Aeronaut?
this thread is about worlds best maneuverable aircrafts....
and everyone here knows that this is an era of bvr...i was reacting the post of xyxmt..who is trying to derail the thread by posting offtopic...
mr.krash if want to do policing do to fairly!
 
.
this thread is about worlds best maneuverable aircrafts....
and everyone here knows that this is an era of bvr...i was reacting the post of xyxmt..who is trying to derail the thread by posting offtopic...
mr.krash if want to do policing do to fairly!

Honestly, I've given up on trying to curb trolling. I only reported your's for going a tad over on rudeness.
 
.
Actually, the video does not provide any metrics of the listed criteria factored for the rankings. The rankings look rather dubious. I was fairly sure the F-16s (or at least their derivative, the F-2) would/should have made the cut.
 
.
Manoeuvrability holds little to a 60g manoeuvring imaging seeker equipped killer that is the modern WVR missile. Dancing in the sky will not save you from death in that scenario.
All that will save you is situational awareness and first look and first shot.
 
. .
shakal achi na ho to acha bolna to seekh ley
i pity that u r not sure of ur gender had to emphasize by making it ur profile pic...and u btr refrain frm posting bullsh!t and ruin threads...if u cant contribute to the thread...jus leave...dont make others waste bandwidth too...
 
.
Manoeuvrability holds little to a 60g manoeuvring imaging seeker equipped killer that is the modern WVR missile. Dancing in the sky will not save you from death in that scenario.
All that will save you is situational awareness and first look and first shot.

I have to somewhat agree with what he is saying. Most of the videos are showing low speed maneuvering. If that were the criteria the Harrier would win hands down because it can stop in mid air and spin on a dime. But how realistic is that in a real world engagement. Not very.
 
.
i pity that u r not sure of ur gender had to emphasize by making it ur profile pic...and u btr refrain frm posting bullsh!t and ruin threads...if u cant contribute to the thread...jus leave...dont make others waste bandwidth too...

duffers are known by the way they talk and what they say, I dont know what this duffer is talking about because I dont have profile pic but even if I have one how does it effect a duffer on the internet, go learn to talk first duffer then come talk to me. I dont have time for low quality people like you. Ever since internet got cheaper these cheap desi people are over crowding it with their text learned english.

I am wasting bandwidth you are a wasted sperm it seems
 
Last edited:
.
duffers are known by the way they talk and what they say, I dont know what this duffer is talking about because I dont have profile pic but even if I have one how does it effect a duffer on the internet, go learn to talk first duffer then come talk to me. I dont have time for low quality people like you. Ever since internet got cheaper these cheap desi people are over crowding it with their text learned english.

I am wasting bandwidth you are a wasted sperm it seems
seems like u r in a dry streak...and obviously frustated...sleep nw and come back when u r sober!
 
. . .
I have to somewhat agree with what he is saying. Most of the videos are showing low speed maneuvering. If that were the criteria the Harrier would win hands down because it can stop in mid air and spin on a dime. But how realistic is that in a real world engagement. Not very.

Both the F-16 and F/A-18C are still in the top 7 if not top three fighters that can kill other fighters with relative ease if flown in its envelope by an experienced pilot repeatedly. The Hornet was considered one of the best dogfighters because of its ability to tango at lower speeds and high alpha.. By contrast... the F-16 is designed much for the "fighter slot".. the energy fight, Yet there are more reports of F-16 pilots killing Hornets in Red Flag and other DACT tests..not to mention NSAWC where Top Gun folks in the aggressor F-16s waste Hornet fliers ..Why?
80% of dogfights happen between 15-30k ft.. and around 450 knots.. and that is where the F-16 outperforms the hornet. The Hornet however, due to its higher alpha.. gets to point its nose faster..So if it can get the first shot into the merge.. it can kill. But once the F-16 goes into its zone of possibly still one of the best sustained turned rates coupled with a good T/W ratio for a fighter.. you are dead. Does that mean the F-16 is a better fighter than the hornet. Not necessarily, it depends on the pilot and him knowing where his aircraft excels. The Hornet flier will look to force the energy fighter to lose his energy.. force him into the slow knife fight where he has the advantage.. The F-16 pilot will look to use his superb sustained rate to deny the hornet his comfort zone.

Now, TVC has its interesting limits, Many of our Indian posters dont like a certain video from Red Flag 2008 on the performance of their Sukhoi-30MKI fighter. Specifically because its not very flattering. While given that the American pilot(who is quite experienced and a Nellis Weapons school alumni and instructor) was a little too harsh in his discourse on the engagement; he was not wrong on the "usefulness" of TVC in combat and how much it matters at the speeds most dogfights take place.
Regardless, it was not very flattering to the proponents of 3d thrust vectoring and these Aerial ballets of the Sukhois. TVC is a great thing to have, no doubt.. the F-22 is testament. However, the advent of systems such the AIM-9X/JHCMS and R-73/TOPSIGHT combination has made the turning fight a lot less relevant as compared to the information fight: i.e. greater situational awareness before your opponent has it. John Boyd's OODA loop still stands... its just changed its context.

There is one advantage that the TVC equipped aircraft bring.. and that is the ability to point their nose quickly.. That gives first shot advantage in a merge situation against a fighter that is not equipped with a Helmet mounted display. Against someone who has only to look at you to shoot(say a F-16 with Aim-9X and JHCMS); the TVC is not going to save you from the imaging seeker of the AIM-9x that is guiding a missile capable of 60g manoeuvres. All it will allow you(if the TVC fighter does not have similar High off boresight missiles paired with a Helmet mounted display) is the ability to fire back before you die.
 
.
Manoeuvrability holds little to a 60g manoeuvring imaging seeker equipped killer that is the modern WVR missile. Dancing in the sky will not save you from death in that scenario.
All that will save you is situational awareness and first look and first shot.
K77 Aesa seeker coupled with the ramjet propulsion a'la Rvv-sd launched from a Aesa Craft might make BVR even more interesting? Future of air combat will eventually become , farthest seeing craft with a barrage of No-escape missiles playing battleship on mission computers.

Now when it comes to MKI, it's ballads often overshadow the fact that it is extremely agile at supersonic speed, not just due to it's TVC but also due to it's fore planes, on a head to head comparison, I believe it might even shame the new toys of IAF which is another story.

Another tiny note is MKI configuration in pure A2A setup reduces it weight drastically compared to it's Strike configuration, with that amount of fuel, and more afterburner time on those massive engines, it can put down a lot of energy which can compensate it's bleeds in turning fights.

The key issue again is pilots sticking to their advantages in flight envelope... If the setting is right at treetop level ambush, even the fishbed can down the leader of the pack...
 
.
An honorable mention to the Colonial Viper

27wwykn.jpg
 
.
Back
Top Bottom